Nefarious Numbers
Douglas N. Arnold, Kristine K. Fowler
TL;DR
This paper critically examines the journal impact factor in applied mathematics, revealing that it is often manipulated and does not accurately reflect journal quality or align with expert opinions.
Contribution
It provides an analysis of impact factor manipulation and demonstrates its poor correlation with expert assessments in applied mathematics.
Findings
Impact factor can be manipulated.
Poor correlation with expert opinion.
Questions validity as a quality metric.
Abstract
We investigate the journal impact factor, focusing on the applied mathematics category. We discuss impact factor manipulation and demonstrate that the impact factor gives an inaccurate view of journal quality, which is poorly correlated with expert opinion.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsHistory and Theory of Mathematics · Mathematics, Computing, and Information Processing · Mathematics Education and Programs